Gambling Commission clampdown is welcome but punters need backing

There was further evidence this morning that the Gambling Commission takes at least some of its objectives seriously, when it issued a £6.2m fine to William Hill for breaches of regulations to prevent money laundering and ensure that “children and other vulnerable people”, such as problem gamblers, are “protected from being harmed or exploited by gambling”.

An investigation found that 10 customers of the firm had been allowed to deposit significant sums of money linked to criminal offences, including one customer who was stealing from their employer to fund a gambling problem and another who was defrauding elderly victims to do the same. Hills made £1.2m from its failure to ensure that its systems and staffing were adequate to respond to repeated alerts with regard to activity on the accounts, which will now be returned to the victims of the crimes where possible.

The fine imposed on Hills follows other recent cases including a record £7.8m penalty for 888.com last year for failing in its duty of care to problem gamblers, about 7,000 of whom were still able to access their accounts and place bets despite voluntarily asking to be excluded. The Gambling Commission seems increasingly willing to bare its teeth when necessary, but this does also make you wonder when it might turn its attention to the third part of its mission statement, alongside a determination to ensure that criminality is kept out of gambling and that the vulnerable are protected.

READ MORE: Horse Racing - Samcro odds-on for Ballymore Hurdle at Cheltenham Festival

READ MORE: Horse Racing - Fehily goes for gold with Our Duke ride

That third aim is to ensure that “gambling is conducted in a fair and open way”, which must raise a hollow laugh from thousands of the punters that the Gambling Commission is supposed to be working for. They are the ones whose stakes on racing and sport are routinely refused or restricted to pennies by online bookmakers, even when they are asking a firm which turns over billions each year for a £10 or £20 bet. In most cases, their only crime is to have shown some aptitude for finding winners at decent prices, though these days, even backing losers can result in your account being restricted if you regularly better the SP.

Punters with little or no interest in the mechanics of price-based betting, and those who gamble instead on casino games which have a guaranteed margin for the operator, do not suffer similar restrictions. Quite how this situation can be described as either open or fair is beyond me, but it has developed because, so far at least, the Gambling Commission has shown no inclination to do anything about it. Well done to them for keeping out criminals and protecting the vulnerable. Now what about the punters who just want a fair bet at an advertised price?